NIAA to hear reports on Gorman, private schools

It was hinted at several times Monday. Even brought up in public comment, and tap-danced around in talk about proposed membership categories.

But the Nevada Interscholastic Activities Association Board of Control’s discussion about the public/private school debate, or more specifically what to do about Bishop Gorman, hasn’t come yet.

The topic likely will take raised after the board reconvenes at 8:30 a.m. today at The Orleans. But it’s a debate that won’t be resolved today.

“I don’t know that there’s much to discuss,” NIAA executive director Eddie Bonine said. “The subcommittee (that met on May 2) will give its report. The school district will give its report, but I just don’t see it being anything heated.

“I don’t see it being a conflict.”

On Monday, a Gorman alumnus read a short, prepared statement during the first round of public comment, but no one else in the sparsely attending meeting asked to speak.

“Faith Lutheran, Gorman, Bishop Manogue, as far as the record is concerned, they all have the same number of violations,” said Victor Perea, who added that he received tuition assistance but did not play sports while attending Gorman. “I’m not saying my alma mater has never done anything wrong. If there is a violation of rules or cheating, then absolutely it needs to be addressed.”

That was the extent of mentioning Bishop Gorman by name.

The board held off on approving an associate membership status, which was discussed mainly as a way to help smaller schools, especially new members, gain a sort of independent status as they build programs. Associate members would agree to not play for championships and would play a limited schedule against public and private schools.

NIAA legal counsel Paul Anderson appeared to hint at that status being used for another reason, either as a spot for Bishop Gorman or for the Clark County School District, should it decide it no longer wants to play Gorman.

“I just believe that with the state of things at this time, it’s a divisive issue,” Anderson said. “It can be read to serve a different purpose, and that would be for a block of schools to no longer participate at the level they are now.”

The board asked for more specific language and asked that associate membership applications include the approval of principals and superintendent. It’s likely to be brought up again at the board’s next meeting in October.

“It brings a lot of latitude for a lot of different types of member schools,” said board member Ray Mathis, the CCSD’s executive athletic director. “We do need to do some additional language before we vote on it.”